Mueller outlines scope of Russia probe in court filing

[webfact]

Mueller outlines scope of Russia probe in court filing

By Sarah N. Lynch

 

FILE PHOTO: FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on Federal Bureau of Investigation oversight on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, U.S., June 13, 2013. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office on Thursday gave a federal court a classified memo describing the extent of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and other related crimes.

 

The memo was filed in response to questions raised in the court in Virginia two weeks ago by Judge T.S. Ellis that Mueller should not have "unfettered powers."

 

Ellis demanded to see an unredacted copy of the August 2017 memo written by U.S. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein that defined Mueller's investigative mandate.

 

Ellis will review the memo before deciding whether or not to dismiss charges against President Donald Trump's former election campaign manager, Paul Manafort.

 

Manafort has argued that Rosenstein granted Mueller too much scope when he was appointed exactly a year ago, and that Mueller is exceeding that authority.

 

Trump's allies have also accused Mueller of exceeding the boundaries laid out by Rosenstein, and questioned whether he is authorized to pursue possible financial crimes committed by Manafort and others.

 

Mueller has indicted Manafort in federal courts in Virginia and Washington D.C. with an array of allegations of money-laundering and failing to register as a foreign agent, to bank and tax fraud. Manafort has pleaded not guilty.

 

The judge overseeing the Washington case earlier this week refused Manafort's request that he dismiss the charges there.

 

When Mueller was appointed special counsel on May 17, 2017, Rosenstein said the probe would include "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation" into possible collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia during the 2016 election.

 

Russia denies interfering in the 2016 election, and Trump has said there was no collusion with Russia.

 

In August, Rosenstein authorized Mueller to investigate allegations that Manafort may have "committed a crime or crimes arising out of payments he received from the Ukrainian government" before and while pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych was in office.

 

Some of Mueller's actions remain under seal. He also has indicted more than 15 others, including 13 Russians and three Russian companies.

 

Five people have pleaded guilty, including former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn, who has admitted making false statements to the FBI, and longtime Manafort business partner Rick Gates.

 

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch and John Walcott; editing by Jonathan Oatis and Grant McCool)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-05-18

[BobBKK]

"other related crimes"   maybe the US interfering in other countries?  or is it just Big Bad Russia?  lol  

[riclag]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

When Mueller was appointed special counsel on May 17, 2017, Rosenstein said the probe would include "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation" into possible collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia during the 2016 election.

Why did Rosenstein change the memo(8/17) after they raided Manafort house(7/17). If the original letter to Mueller said, Mueller has the power to investigate anything he finds while investigating Russian collusion .Why add redacted scope!

Edited May 18, 2018 by riclag

[zaphod reborn]

Just a delaying tactic by Manafort who faces a trial in Virginia on July 10.  If the charges are dismissed, they will be refiled by the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

[dave_boo]

A bit embarrassing as an American. 

 

While I didn't vote for the orange canary, this obvious witch hunt is a black eye for us on the world stage. If one is to dig hard enough they could find felony offenses on any citizen. 

 

The incessant cheerleading by sore losers is soul crushing prosaicness defined. Don't like the fact that your team lost? Work inside the system so you win next time. Reach out to those 'dumb hicks' in the fly over states rather than denigrating them. Don't appreciate the fact that the majority can not steamroll the minority? Introduce an Amendment. But remember that majorities change and some day you may miss those protections. 

 

So while 4 years of being the laughing stock stings; taking the low road just implies that all of us deserve ridicule.

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, BobBKK said:

"other related crimes"   maybe the US interfering in other countries?  or is it just Big Bad Russia?  lol  

Whataboutary 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, riclag said:

Why did Rosenstein change the memo(8/17) after they raided Manafort house(7/17). If the original letter to Mueller said, Mueller has the power to investigate anything he finds while investigating Russian collusion .Why add redacted scope!

Source of your claim that Rosenstein changed the memo in the time sequence you have given?

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, dave_boo said:

A bit embarrassing as an American. 

 

While I didn't vote for the orange canary, this obvious witch hunt is a black eye for us on the world stage. If one is to dig hard enough they could find felony offenses on any citizen. 

 

The incessant cheerleading by sore losers is soul crushing prosaicness defined. Don't like the fact that your team lost? Work inside the system so you win next time. Reach out to those 'dumb hicks' in the fly over states rather than denigrating them. Don't appreciate the fact that the majority can not steamroll the minority? Introduce an Amendment. But remember that majorities change and some day you may miss those protections. 

 

So while 4 years of being the laughing stock stings; taking the low road just implies that all of us deserve ridicule.

This obvious witch hunt has put one witch in the slammer and five witches have pleaded guilty.

 

More to come.

 

And as a point of correction the majority voted for Clinton.

 

Their vote steamrolled by the electoral college.

Edited May 18, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[Redline]

4 hours ago, BobBKK said:

"other related crimes"   maybe the US interfering in other countries?  or is it just Big Bad Russia?  lol  

Suck it up authoritarian fan ?

[riclag]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Source of your claim that Rosenstein changed the memo in the time sequence you have given?

5-17- original letter to Mueller,

"The FBI conducted a predawn July raid on the home of President Donald Trump's campaign chairman", 

http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-paul-manafort-home-raid-russia-probe-2017-8

"In light of the Special Counsel’s public acknowledgement of the August 2 memo", 

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/doj-considering-releasing-redacted-portions-of-rosenstein-memo/

Expanding the scope Rosenstein testimony at the senate commitee

https://www.weeklystandard.com/michael-warren/white-house-watch-is-the-mueller-investigation-expanding-its-scope

 

OP-Why did Rosenstein change the memo(8/17) after they raided Manafort house(7/17). If the original letter to Mueller said, Mueller has the power to investigate anything he finds while investigating Russian collusion .Why add redacted scope!

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, riclag said:

5-17- original letter to Mueller,

"The FBI conducted a predawn July raid on the home of President Donald Trump's campaign chairman", 

http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-paul-manafort-home-raid-russia-probe-2017-8

"In light of the Special Counsel’s public acknowledgement of the August 2 memo", 

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/doj-considering-releasing-redacted-portions-of-rosenstein-memo/

Expanding the scope Rosenstein testimony at the senate commitee

https://www.weeklystandard.com/michael-warren/white-house-watch-is-the-mueller-investigation-expanding-its-scope

 

OP-Why did Rosenstein change the memo(8/17) after they raided Manafort house(7/17). If the original letter to Mueller said, Mueller has the power to investigate anything he finds while investigating Russian collusion .Why add redacted scope!

Firstly, thanks for providing the links, there’s so much information in this case it’s very easy to miss some of it, so thanks again.

 

The way I read the reports you’ve linked is there is only one memo; the raw interacted text and the redacted text, I don’t see any evidence of a ‘revised’ memo.

 

Redacting text during an investigation is of course common place and should certainly be expected were the case include matters of national security.

 

 

[riclag]

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Firstly, thanks for providing the links, there’s so much information in this case it’s very easy to miss some of it, so thanks again.

 

The way I read the reports you’ve linked is there is only one memo; the raw interacted text and the redacted text, I don’t see any evidence of a ‘revised’ memo.

 

Redacting text during an investigation is of course common place and should certainly be expected were the case include matters of national security.

 

 

The original 1 page  letter with no redaction was to investigate RI and anything that comes during the investigation.

The memo which came later(8/17) is the new scope which is redacted

[bristolboy]

6 hours ago, dave_boo said:

A bit embarrassing as an American. 

 

While I didn't vote for the orange canary, this obvious witch hunt is a black eye for us on the world stage. If one is to dig hard enough they could find felony offenses on any citizen. 

 

The incessant cheerleading by sore losers is soul crushing prosaicness defined. Don't like the fact that your team lost? Work inside the system so you win next time. Reach out to those 'dumb hicks' in the fly over states rather than denigrating them. Don't appreciate the fact that the majority can not steamroll the minority? Introduce an Amendment. But remember that majorities change and some day you may miss those protections. 

 

So while 4 years of being the laughing stock stings; taking the low road just implies that all of us deserve ridicule.

Another "I don't like Trump but..."

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, riclag said:

The original 1 page  letter with no redaction was to investigate RI and anything that comes during the investigation.

The memo which came later(8/17) is the new scope which is redacted

Where is this original 1 page memo with no redaction? If it's not redacted, then it should be able to be read in full. I have found absolutely no source for it on the internet. All I have found is a redacted version of the memo dated aug 2, 2017.

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Firstly, thanks for providing the links, there’s so much information in this case it’s very easy to miss some of it, so thanks again.

 

The way I read the reports you’ve linked is there is only one memo; the raw interacted text and the redacted text, I don’t see any evidence of a ‘revised’ memo.

 

Redacting text during an investigation is of course common place and should certainly be expected were the case include matters of national security.

 

 

I believe that riclag believes "redacted" and "revised" mean the same thing.

[riclag]

46 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Where is this original 1 page memo with no redaction? If it's not redacted, then it should be able to be read in full. I have found absolutely no source for it on the internet. All I have found is a redacted version of the memo dated aug 2, 2017.

Did they ever expand the scope?

Edited May 18, 2018 by riclag

[bristolboy]

12 minutes ago, riclag said:

Did they ever expand the scope?

I googled "Rosenstein revised memo" and came up with nothing.

[watcharacters]

 

 

Does anyone else see the noose tightening around this whole proceeding?

 

 

Remember Haldeman's saying about putting the toothpaste back in the tube?

 

As the supporting soldiers fall to the ground the CIC will face greater challenges  keeping his ground.

 

Maybe he should go off to play another game of golf or a perhaps  dozen or more..

 

 

 

[riclag]

6 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I googled "Rosenstein revised memo" and came up with nothing.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5574637/What-did-Rosenstein-authorize-Mueller-probe-Huge-portions-scope-memo-redacted.html

[bristolboy]

18 minutes ago, riclag said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5574637/What-did-Rosenstein-authorize-Mueller-probe-Huge-portions-scope-memo-redacted.html

This article is about the redaction of said memo. Nothing in it about revision.

[riclag]

Just now, bristolboy said:

This article is about the redaction of said memo. Nothing in it about revision.

The original letter had the scope and authorization to investigate  5/17,Rosenstein revised the scope 8/17 by including a memo to Mueller that expanded the scope to include Manafort with redaction's. Manafort was raided in July before the revised  scope was issued.

[bristolboy]

Just now, riclag said:

The original letter had the scope and authorization to investigate  5/17,Rosenstein revised the scope 8/17 by including a memo to Mueller that expanded the scope to include Manafort with redaction's. Manafort was raided in July before the revised  scope was issued.

I googled that alleged revision. I couldn't find it.

[watcharacters]

Just now, bristolboy said:

I googled that alleged revision. I couldn't find it.

 

 

If you googled it and couldn't find it then clearly it's just not there.

 

 

[riclag]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I googled that alleged revision. I couldn't find it.

Ok !what came first the letter or the memo(revised) 

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, riclag said:

Ok !what came first the letter or the memo(revised) 

What letter?

[riclag]

off to the restaurant 

[bristolboy]

3 minutes ago, watcharacters said:

 

 

If you googled it and couldn't find it then clearly it's just not there.

 

 

It seems to me that it's incumbent upon someone who asserts that something exists, to provide evidence to back up that assertion

That said, I know for a fact that Mueller has absolute proof that Donald Trump is taking his orders directly from Satan. And if you can't find evidence backing my assertion up, that signifies nothing. It's true.

[watcharacters]

3 minutes ago, riclag said:

off to the restaurant 

 

 

You mean   BACK TO THE PUB / BAR.

[watcharacters]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

It seems to me that it's incumbent upon someone who asserts that something exists, to provide evidence to back up that assertion

That said, I know for a fact that Mueller has absolute proof that Donald Trump is taking his orders directly from Satan. And if you can't find evidence backing my assertion up, that signifies nothing. It's true.

 

 

You are a blooming genius!

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

What exactly is the illiberal argument here?

 

That an investigation into crimes against the USA should not be expanded if it finds more crimes against the USA??

Edited May 18, 2018 by Chomper Higgot